Search Employment Law

Ronald Shea's hours at STLand Contracting fell sharply before he was told by phone that there was no more work for him. He also alleged bullying and an unsafe workplace, while the employer had undertaken no redundancy or dismissal consultation.

Fiona Scott signed a casual agreement with Ritchies but in practice regularly drove urban bus routes. After disciplinary issues arose, the employer relied on the casual characterisation and later ended her work, raising questions about her real status and the justification for dismissal.

Shaoqiang Chen worked long hours as a cook at Beached As Takeaways, was paid cash below lawful rates and later had his employment ended. The case involved employer identity, minimum-wage and holiday entitlements, record failures and the justification for dismissal.

Angus Jowitt worked in a music shop under a disputed contractor-or-employee arrangement and was paid cash below the rate the employer accepted had been agreed. After a conflict over work and coffee, the employer later relied on resignation rather than dismissal.

North Beach relied on a 90-day trial clause to argue Noel Camacho could not bring an unjustified-dismissal grievance, but the same employment agreement also contained a probation clause that conflicted with the trial wording.

Healthcare assistant Shubanghi Kaushal was suspended and then summarily dismissed after an incident the employer characterised as serious misconduct. The ERA examined the incident in context, an existing final warning and whether dismissal was within the range open to a fair and reasonable employer.

Shania Mortimer was dismissed by Auckland Steam 'N' Dry under a purported trial period. The dispute concerned whether the trial clause was legally effective, whether any dismissal process occurred, and the employer's wage and record-keeping compliance.

Mr Blignaut challenged Waste Management's treatment of him during a workplace conflict, including alleged bullying, suspension and pressure to resign, before he was ultimately dismissed for alleged serious misconduct. The ERA considered both the pre-dismissal disadvantage claims and the termination itself.